TED2009
Dan Ariely: Our buggy moral code
ダン・アリエリー
Filmed:
Readability: 3.2
3,509,395 views
ダン・アリエリーは私たちのモラルに潜む落とし穴に注目する行動経済学者です。何故、ずるいことをしたり、（時として）盗みを働いても平気だという考え方が生まれてくるのか、その隠された真実を探ります。ユニークで愉快な実験を通して、彼は人が「予想通りに不合理」で無意識のうちに自分たちの判断を左右されているのだと指摘します。
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:16
I want to talk to you today a little bit
0
1000
2000
今日のテーマは
00:18
about predictable irrationality.
1
3000
3000
「予想通りの不合理さ」です
00:21
And my interest in irrational behavior
2
6000
4000
私が「不合理な行動」に興味を持ったのは
00:25
started many years ago in the hospital.
3
10000
3000
ずいぶん前に病院でのこと
00:28
I was burned very badly.
4
13000
4000
私は酷い火傷を負ったことがあります
00:32
And if you spend a lot of time in hospital,
5
17000
3000
病院で何年か過ごす間に
00:35
you'll see a lot of types of irrationalities.
6
20000
3000
色々な不合理さが目につき
00:38
And the one that particularly bothered me in the burn department
7
23000
5000
特に 火傷病棟で私の頭を悩ませたのは
00:43
was the process by which the nurses took the bandage off me.
8
28000
4000
看護師たちの包帯の剥がし方です
00:48
Now, you must have all taken a Band-Aid off at some point,
9
33000
2000
さて 今皆さんはバンドエイドを
00:50
and you must have wondered what's the right approach.
10
35000
3000
剥がそうとしています
00:53
Do you rip it off quickly -- short duration but high intensity --
11
38000
4000
さっさと剥がして 短いが激しい痛みに耐えるか
00:57
or do you take your Band-Aid off slowly --
12
42000
2000
ゆっくり剥がして
00:59
you take a long time, but each second is not as painful --
13
44000
4000
長めの穏やかな痛みに耐えるか
01:03
which one of those is the right approach?
14
48000
3000
どちらがよいでしょう？
01:06
The nurses in my department thought that the right approach
15
51000
4000
私の病棟の看護師たちの持論は
01:10
was the ripping one, so they would grab hold and they would rip,
16
55000
3000
さっさと剥がす方で かまえては引き剥がし
01:13
and they would grab hold and they would rip.
17
58000
2000
かまえては一気に引き剥がしたのです
01:15
And because I had 70 percent of my body burned, it would take about an hour.
18
60000
4000
私の火傷は全身の70％に及びましたから
01:19
And as you can imagine,
19
64000
3000
一時間はかかり 引き剥がす間の
01:22
I hated that moment of ripping with incredible intensity.
20
67000
4000
あの恐ろしい痛みが嫌でしたね
01:26
And I would try to reason with them and say,
21
71000
2000
だから ある時頼んでみました
01:28
"Why don't we try something else?
22
73000
1000
「もう少し
01:29
Why don't we take it a little longer --
23
74000
2000
ゆっくりと剥がしてよ
01:31
maybe two hours instead of an hour -- and have less of this intensity?"
24
76000
5000
2時間ぐらいはかけて 痛みを和らげられないの」と
01:36
And the nurses told me two things.
25
81000
2000
看護師が言うには
01:38
They told me that they had the right model of the patient --
26
83000
4000
自分たちは患者の扱い方を知っているし
01:42
that they knew what was the right thing to do to minimize my pain --
27
87000
3000
痛みを抑える方法もわかっている
01:45
and they also told me that the word patient doesn't mean
28
90000
3000
それに「患者」という言葉に
01:48
to make suggestions or to interfere or ...
29
93000
2000
「助言」や「邪魔」をする意味はないと
01:50
This is not just in Hebrew, by the way.
30
95000
3000
私が知る限りでは
01:53
It's in every language I've had experience with so far.
31
98000
3000
このことは万国共通のようです
01:56
And, you know, there's not much -- there wasn't much I could do,
32
101000
4000
とにかく 私にはどうにもできないまま
02:00
and they kept on doing what they were doing.
33
105000
3000
看護師は同じように続けました
02:03
And about three years later, when I left the hospital,
34
108000
2000
それから3年後には退院して
02:05
I started studying at the university.
35
110000
3000
大学で勉強を始めました
02:08
And one of the most interesting lessons I learned
36
113000
3000
そこで面白いことを学びました
02:11
was that there is an experimental method
37
116000
2000
自分が疑問に思うことを
02:13
that if you have a question you can create a replica of this question
38
118000
4000
抽象的な質問の形に作り変え
02:17
in some abstract way, and you can try to examine this question,
39
122000
4000
その質問の答を探ることで この世界について
02:21
maybe learn something about the world.
40
126000
2000
少しヒントが得られることを知ったのです
02:23
So that's what I did.
41
128000
2000
だから試してみました
02:25
I was still interested
42
130000
1000
私はその時もまだ
02:26
in this question of how do you take bandages off burn patients.
43
131000
2000
火傷患者の包帯の剥がし方が気になっていました
02:28
So originally I didn't have much money,
44
133000
3000
初めは あまりお金がなく
02:31
so I went to a hardware store and I bought a carpenter's vice.
45
136000
4000
万力を買ってきて
02:35
And I would bring people to the lab and I would put their finger in it,
46
140000
4000
研究室に人を集めて 指を間に挟ませ
02:39
and I would crunch it a little bit.
47
144000
2000
少しだけ締めてみました
02:41
(Laughter)
48
146000
2000
(笑）
02:43
And I would crunch it for long periods and short periods,
49
148000
3000
長めに締め付けたり 短めだったり
02:46
and pain that went up and pain that went down,
50
151000
2000
痛みを強めては弱め
02:48
and with breaks and without breaks -- all kinds of versions of pain.
51
153000
4000
しばらく続けたあとには少し間をあけて
02:52
And when I finished hurting people a little bit, I would ask them,
52
157000
2000
痛みを与えるたびに
02:54
so, how painful was this? Or, how painful was this?
53
159000
2000
どう痛かったか？
02:56
Or, if you had to choose between the last two,
54
161000
2000
選ぶとすれば
02:58
which one would you choose?
55
163000
2000
どちらの痛みを選ぶか？と聞きました
03:00
(Laughter)
56
165000
3000
（笑）
03:03
I kept on doing this for a while.
57
168000
3000
しばらく続けましたよ
03:06
(Laughter)
58
171000
2000
（笑）
03:08
And then, like all good academic projects, I got more funding.
59
173000
4000
研究費をもらえるようになってからは
03:12
I moved to sounds, electrical shocks --
60
177000
2000
他の痛みも試してみました
03:14
I even had a pain suit that I could get people to feel much more pain.
61
179000
5000
不快な音 電気ショック 拷問スーツまで
03:19
But at the end of this process,
62
184000
4000
そしてこれらの実験から 看護師たちが
03:23
what I learned was that the nurses were wrong.
63
188000
3000
間違っていたことがわかりました
03:26
Here were wonderful people with good intentions
64
191000
3000
看護師たちは あれだけの善意と
03:29
and plenty of experience, and nevertheless
65
194000
2000
経験を持ち合わせても
03:31
they were getting things wrong predictably all the time.
66
196000
4000
予想通り間違うことを証明したのです
03:35
It turns out that because we don't encode duration
67
200000
3000
私たちは 持続時間と痛みの強さを
03:38
in the way that we encode intensity,
68
203000
2000
同じ計りで計っていないようです
03:40
I would have had less pain if the duration would have been longer
69
205000
4000
もしゆっくりと包帯を剥がしていたら
03:44
and the intensity was lower.
70
209000
2000
ずっと痛みは軽減されていたでしょう
03:46
It turns out it would have been better to start with my face,
71
211000
3000
より痛みの強い顔の方から脚の方へ
03:49
which was much more painful, and move toward my legs,
72
214000
2000
包帯を剥がしていたら
03:51
giving me a trend of improvement over time --
73
216000
3000
苦痛は軽い方へ向かうのですから
03:54
that would have been also less painful.
74
219000
1000
恐らく痛みも和らいでいたでしょう
03:55
And it also turns out that it would have been good
75
220000
2000
また 途中で少し
03:57
to give me breaks in the middle to kind of recuperate from the pain.
76
222000
2000
休憩を入れてもよかったようです
03:59
All of these would have been great things to do,
77
224000
2000
改善の余地はありました
04:01
and my nurses had no idea.
78
226000
3000
しかし 看護師は知らなかったのです
04:04
And from that point on I started thinking,
79
229000
1000
そこで私が考えたのは
04:05
are the nurses the only people in the world who get things wrong
80
230000
3000
これは看護師に限ったことなのか
04:08
in this particular decision, or is it a more general case?
81
233000
3000
もっと一般的に当てはまるのか ということです
04:11
And it turns out it's a more general case --
82
236000
2000
答えは後者です
04:13
there's a lot of mistakes we do.
83
238000
3000
私たちは多くの間違いを犯します
04:16
And I want to give you one example of one of these irrationalities,
84
241000
5000
この不合理の具体例の一つが
04:21
and I want to talk to you about cheating.
85
246000
3000
不正行為です
04:24
And the reason I picked cheating is because it's interesting,
86
249000
2000
ここで紹介する興味深い実験は
04:26
but also it tells us something, I think,
87
251000
2000
昨今の混沌とした証券市場にも
04:28
about the stock market situation we're in.
88
253000
3000
応用できます
04:31
So, my interest in cheating started
89
256000
3000
私がはじめに不正に興味を持ったのは
04:34
when Enron came on the scene, exploded all of a sudden,
90
259000
2000
2001年のエンロン事件です
04:36
and I started thinking about what is happening here.
91
261000
3000
一体何が起こっていたのでしょう
04:39
Is it the case that there was kind of
92
264000
1000
これは
04:40
a few apples who are capable of doing these things,
93
265000
3000
少数の悪い人間の行いなのか
04:43
or are we talking a more endemic situation,
94
268000
2000
それとも人間に特有の
04:45
that many people are actually capable of behaving this way?
95
270000
4000
誰もが犯しうる過ちだったのでしょうか
04:49
So, like we usually do, I decided to do a simple experiment.
96
274000
4000
そこで いつも通り 単純な実験を
04:53
And here's how it went.
97
278000
1000
行ってみました
04:54
If you were in the experiment, I would pass you a sheet of paper
98
279000
3000
皆さんに 紙を一枚配るとします
04:57
with 20 simple math problems that everybody could solve,
99
282000
4000
簡単な誰もが解ける数学の問題20問です
05:01
but I wouldn't give you enough time.
100
286000
2000
しかし 十分な時間がありません
05:03
When the five minutes were over, I would say,
101
288000
2000
制限時間は5分で
05:05
"Pass me the sheets of paper, and I'll pay you a dollar per question."
102
290000
3000
答案を回収します 一問正解につき一ドル払います
05:08
People did this. I would pay people four dollars for their task --
103
293000
4000
平均正解数は4問
05:12
on average people would solve four problems.
104
297000
2000
平均4ドル渡しました
05:14
Other people I would tempt to cheat.
105
299000
3000
次に 別の人たちにはわざと不正を働くよう仕掛けをします
05:17
I would pass their sheet of paper.
106
302000
1000
今度も
05:18
When the five minutes were over, I would say,
107
303000
2000
紙を配り 5分後にこう言います
05:20
"Please shred the piece of paper.
108
305000
1000
「紙を破き
05:21
Put the little pieces in your pocket or in your backpack,
109
306000
3000
ポケットか鞄にしまってください
05:24
and tell me how many questions you got correctly."
110
309000
3000
そして 何問正解したかを教えてください」
05:27
People now solved seven questions on average.
111
312000
3000
正解は平均７問に増えました
05:30
Now, it wasn't as if there was a few bad apples --
112
315000
5000
これは 少数の悪人が
05:35
a few people cheated a lot.
113
320000
3000
たくさんズルをしたのではなく
05:38
Instead, what we saw is a lot of people who cheat a little bit.
114
323000
3000
実は 多くの人が少しズルをしたのです
05:41
Now, in economic theory,
115
326000
3000
さて 経済学の理論では
05:44
cheating is a very simple cost-benefit analysis.
116
329000
3000
不正は単純な費用便益分析の一例です
05:47
You say, what's the probability of being caught?
117
332000
2000
捕まる確率は？
05:49
How much do I stand to gain from cheating?
118
334000
3000
不正から得られる価値はいくらか？
05:52
And how much punishment would I get if I get caught?
119
337000
2000
捕まったらどんな罰を受けるのか？
05:54
And you weigh these options out --
120
339000
2000
これらを計りにかけます
05:56
you do the simple cost-benefit analysis,
121
341000
2000
これが単純な費用便益分析です
05:58
and you decide whether it's worthwhile to commit the crime or not.
122
343000
3000
そして 罪を犯す価値があるかどうかを決めます
06:01
So, we try to test this.
123
346000
2000
そこで 次の実験では
06:03
For some people, we varied how much money they could get away with --
124
348000
4000
持ち逃げさせる金額を変えてみました
06:07
how much money they could steal.
125
352000
1000
いくらなら盗むか
06:08
We paid them 10 cents per correct question, 50 cents,
126
353000
3000
一問あたり 10セント 50セント
06:11
a dollar, five dollars, 10 dollars per correct question.
127
356000
3000
1ドル 5ドル 10ドルと変えてみました
06:14
You would expect that as the amount of money on the table increases,
128
359000
4000
皆さんは 金額が大きいほど不正が増える
06:18
people would cheat more, but in fact it wasn't the case.
129
363000
3000
と思うでしょうが 実際は違いました
06:21
We got a lot of people cheating by stealing by a little bit.
130
366000
3000
多くの人がわずかだけ盗んだのです
06:24
What about the probability of being caught?
131
369000
3000
また 捕まる可能性は？
06:27
Some people shredded half the sheet of paper,
132
372000
2000
ある人は紙を半分だけ破き
06:29
so there was some evidence left.
133
374000
1000
証拠を残し
06:30
Some people shredded the whole sheet of paper.
134
375000
2000
ある人は丸々一枚破き
06:32
Some people shredded everything, went out of the room,
135
377000
3000
ある人は粉々にして 部屋を出てゆき
06:35
and paid themselves from the bowl of money that had over 100 dollars.
136
380000
3000
100ドルは入っているボウルからお金をとりました
06:38
You would expect that as the probability of being caught goes down,
137
383000
3000
ここでは 捕まる可能性が低い方が
06:41
people would cheat more, but again, this was not the case.
138
386000
3000
不正が増えるようですが 同じく 違いました
06:44
Again, a lot of people cheated by just by a little bit,
139
389000
3000
やはり 多くの人が少しだけ不正をしました
06:47
and they were insensitive to these economic incentives.
140
392000
3000
つまり 経済的なインセンティブに反応しなかったのです
06:50
So we said, "If people are not sensitive
141
395000
1000
このように
06:51
to the economic rational theory explanations, to these forces,
142
396000
5000
人々が経済の合理性に見合わない行動をとる
06:56
what could be going on?"
143
401000
3000
そこで何が起きているのか考えてみました
06:59
And we thought maybe what is happening is that there are two forces.
144
404000
3000
私が考えるに そこには2つの力が働いています
07:02
At one hand, we all want to look at ourselves in the mirror
145
407000
2000
一つは 自分の姿を鏡に映し出し
07:04
and feel good about ourselves, so we don't want to cheat.
146
409000
3000
自尊心から 不正を抑えようとする力
07:07
On the other hand, we can cheat a little bit,
147
412000
2000
もう一つは 少しだけなら不正をしても
07:09
and still feel good about ourselves.
148
414000
2000
自尊心はまだ保てるという力です
07:11
So, maybe what is happening is that
149
416000
1000
つまり
07:12
there's a level of cheating we can't go over,
150
417000
2000
超えてはいけない一線を守りながら
07:14
but we can still benefit from cheating at a low degree,
151
419000
4000
自分の評価を傷つけない程度に
07:18
as long as it doesn't change our impressions about ourselves.
152
423000
3000
些細な不正から何かを得ようとするのです
07:21
We call this like a personal fudge factor.
153
426000
3000
これを「私的補正因子」と言います
07:25
Now, how would you test a personal fudge factor?
154
430000
4000
この「私的補正因子」はどのようにテストできるでしょう？
07:29
Initially we said, what can we do to shrink the fudge factor?
155
434000
4000
また「私的補正因子」を減らすにはどうしたらよいでしょうか？
07:33
So, we got people to the lab, and we said,
156
438000
2000
そこで人々を研究室に集め
07:35
"We have two tasks for you today."
157
440000
2000
二つの課題を与えました
07:37
First, we asked half the people
158
442000
1000
まず 半分の人に
07:38
to recall either 10 books they read in high school,
159
443000
2000
高校時代に読んだ本を10冊
07:40
or to recall The Ten Commandments,
160
445000
3000
他の人には「十戒」を思い出してもらうように指示します
07:43
and then we tempted them with cheating.
161
448000
2000
ここでもまた わざとズルをする細工をしました
07:45
Turns out the people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments --
162
450000
3000
結果は 「十戒」を指示された人は
07:48
and in our sample nobody could recall all of The Ten Commandments --
163
453000
2000
誰も10個全ては思い出せませんでした
07:51
but those people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments,
164
456000
4000
でも わざとズルができるようにしたにも関わらず
07:55
given the opportunity to cheat, did not cheat at all.
165
460000
3000
誰も不正を働かなかったのです
07:58
It wasn't that the more religious people --
166
463000
2000
これは 特に熱心な信者が
08:00
the people who remembered more of the Commandments -- cheated less,
167
465000
1000
ズルをしなかった訳でもなく
08:01
and the less religious people --
168
466000
2000
「十戒」と無縁な人が
08:03
the people who couldn't remember almost any Commandments --
169
468000
1000
よりズルをした
08:04
cheated more.
170
469000
2000
訳でもありません
08:06
The moment people thought about trying to recall The Ten Commandments,
171
471000
4000
「十戒」を思い出そうとした瞬間すでに
08:10
they stopped cheating.
172
475000
1000
不正はなくなったのです
08:11
In fact, even when we gave self-declared atheists
173
476000
2000
自称 無宗教者ですら
08:13
the task of swearing on the Bible and we give them a chance to cheat,
174
478000
4000
聖書に手を置き 誓いをたてると
08:17
they don't cheat at all.
175
482000
2000
不正を働く気はなくなったのです
08:21
Now, Ten Commandments is something that is hard
176
486000
2000
さて「十戒」は宗教的で
08:23
to bring into the education system, so we said,
177
488000
2000
教育現場には不向きですから
08:25
"Why don't we get people to sign the honor code?"
178
490000
2000
倫理規定を使って実験を続けることにしました
08:27
So, we got people to sign,
179
492000
2000
倫理規定に
08:29
"I understand that this short survey falls under the MIT Honor Code."
180
494000
4000
「私はここに この調査がMIT倫理規定の適用を受けることを理解しました」と
08:33
Then they shredded it. No cheating whatsoever.
181
498000
3000
署名させ それを破かせました
08:36
And this is particularly interesting,
182
501000
1000
この場合も不正はなくなりました
08:37
because MIT doesn't have an honor code.
183
502000
2000
しかし 面白いことにMITには倫理規定などはありません
08:39
(Laughter)
184
504000
5000
（笑）
08:44
So, all this was about decreasing the fudge factor.
185
509000
4000
これは全て「私的補正因子」を減らすために起こったのです
08:48
What about increasing the fudge factor?
186
513000
3000
それでは「私的補正因子」はどのような時に増えるのでしょう
08:51
The first experiment -- I walked around MIT
187
516000
2000
はじめに 私はキャンパスを歩き回り
08:53
and I distributed six-packs of Cokes in the refrigerators --
188
518000
3000
6缶入りのコーラを様々な場所の冷蔵庫に置きました
08:56
these were common refrigerators for the undergrads.
189
521000
2000
学部生用の共有冷蔵庫です
08:58
And I came back to measure what we technically call
190
523000
3000
私たちは「半生分のコーラ」と呼んでますが
09:01
the half-lifetime of Coke -- how long does it last in the refrigerators?
191
526000
4000
どれぐらい保つか調べてみたのです
09:05
As you can expect it doesn't last very long; people take it.
192
530000
3000
おわかりの通り それほど長くはありません
09:08
In contrast, I took a plate with six one-dollar bills,
193
533000
4000
しかし 代わりに6ドルをのせたお皿を
09:12
and I left those plates in the same refrigerators.
194
537000
3000
同じように冷蔵庫にいれても
09:15
No bill ever disappeared.
195
540000
1000
一枚も無くならなかったのです
09:16
Now, this is not a good social science experiment,
196
541000
3000
され これではよい社会学実験と言えません
09:19
so to do it better I did the same experiment
197
544000
3000
そこで私が先ほど説明した実験を
09:22
as I described to you before.
198
547000
2000
再度行ってみました
09:24
A third of the people we passed the sheet, they gave it back to us.
199
549000
3000
今度は3分の1の人は 紙を私達に戻します
09:27
A third of the people we passed it to, they shredded it,
200
552000
3000
また別の3分の1は 紙を破き
09:30
they came to us and said,
201
555000
1000
私達の所へ来て
09:31
"Mr. Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X dollars."
202
556000
3000
「試験官 私はX問正解しましたから Xドルください」と言います
09:34
A third of the people, when they finished shredding the piece of paper,
203
559000
3000
他の3分の1の人は 紙を破き
09:37
they came to us and said,
204
562000
2000
私達の所へ来て
09:39
"Mr Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X tokens."
205
564000
6000
「試験官 私はX問正解しましたから X枚引換券をください」と言います
09:45
We did not pay them with dollars; we paid them with something else.
206
570000
3000
つまり お金で支払うのではなく 別の物で支払いました
09:48
And then they took the something else, they walked 12 feet to the side,
207
573000
3000
その別の物をもらい 12フィートほど歩いて行って
09:51
and exchanged it for dollars.
208
576000
2000
換金します
09:53
Think about the following intuition.
209
578000
2000
直感的に考えてみてください
09:55
How bad would you feel about taking a pencil from work home,
210
580000
3000
職場から鉛筆を一本盗む時と
09:58
compared to how bad would you feel
211
583000
2000
ちょっと10セントほど小銭を盗むのでは
10:00
about taking 10 cents from a petty cash box?
212
585000
2000
どちらが罪悪感をより強く感じますか？
10:02
These things feel very differently.
213
587000
3000
この二つには大きな違いがあります
10:05
Would being a step removed from cash for a few seconds
214
590000
3000
現金ではなく引換券であったならば
10:08
by being paid by token make a difference?
215
593000
3000
どう違うというのでしょうか？
10:11
Our subjects doubled their cheating.
216
596000
2000
実際 不正は2倍に増えたのです
10:13
I'll tell you what I think
217
598000
2000
ここで私が考えたのは
10:15
about this and the stock market in a minute.
218
600000
2000
この実験と証券市場の関連です
10:18
But this did not solve the big problem I had with Enron yet,
219
603000
4000
もちろん 社会的な要素の強いエンロン事件のような
10:22
because in Enron, there's also a social element.
220
607000
3000
大きな事件の解決にはなりません
10:25
People see each other behaving.
221
610000
1000
要するに 人は他人の振りをみているわけです
10:26
In fact, every day when we open the news
222
611000
2000
事実 毎日ニュースをチェックし
10:28
we see examples of people cheating.
223
613000
2000
人々の不正を目撃します
10:30
What does this cause us?
224
615000
3000
そこからどんな影響を受けるのでしょうか？
10:33
So, we did another experiment.
225
618000
1000
そこで別の実験をしてみました
10:34
We got a big group of students to be in the experiment,
226
619000
3000
大勢の学生を集めて実験協力謝金を
10:37
and we prepaid them.
227
622000
1000
先に渡しました
10:38
So everybody got an envelope with all the money for the experiment,
228
623000
3000
全員 お金が入った封筒を手にします
10:41
and we told them that at the end, we asked them
229
626000
2000
そして最後に 正解できなかった問題の数だけ
10:43
to pay us back the money they didn't make. OK?
230
628000
4000
お金を返すように言いました
10:47
The same thing happens.
231
632000
1000
結果はさほど変わりません
10:48
When we give people the opportunity to cheat, they cheat.
232
633000
2000
不正を働く機会があると 人々はそうします
10:50
They cheat just by a little bit, all the same.
233
635000
3000
しかも 多くの人が少しだけズルをするのです
10:53
But in this experiment we also hired an acting student.
234
638000
3000
ただ 今回の実験では偽物の学生を一人混ぜ
10:56
This acting student stood up after 30 seconds, and said,
235
641000
4000
30秒後に立ち上がらせ こう言わせます
11:00
"I solved everything. What do I do now?"
236
645000
3000
「全部正解したら どうしたらよいですか？」
11:03
And the experimenter said, "If you've finished everything, go home.
237
648000
4000
そして試験官は全て終わったなら そのまま帰るように言います
11:07
That's it. The task is finished."
238
652000
1000
これだけです
11:08
So, now we had a student -- an acting student --
239
653000
4000
さてこの偽物学生は
11:12
that was a part of the group.
240
657000
2000
グループの中に溶け込み
11:14
Nobody knew it was an actor.
241
659000
2000
誰も 演技をしていることは知りません
11:16
And they clearly cheated in a very, very serious way.
242
661000
4000
そして もちろん皆真面目に不正を行うのです
11:20
What would happen to the other people in the group?
243
665000
3000
すると グループの他の人はどうするでしょう？
11:23
Will they cheat more, or will they cheat less?
244
668000
3000
もっとズルをするか しないか？
11:26
Here is what happens.
245
671000
2000
結果はこうです
11:28
It turns out it depends on what kind of sweatshirt they're wearing.
246
673000
4000
実は 結果は着ているパーカーによって違いました
11:32
Here is the thing.
247
677000
2000
つまり
11:34
We ran this at Carnegie Mellon and Pittsburgh.
248
679000
3000
この実験をピッツバーグで行いましたが
11:37
And at Pittsburgh there are two big universities,
249
682000
2000
そこには二つの大学があります
11:39
Carnegie Mellon and University of Pittsburgh.
250
684000
3000
カーネギーメロン大学とピッツバーグ大学です
11:42
All of the subjects sitting in the experiment
251
687000
2000
実験の参加者はみな
11:44
were Carnegie Mellon students.
252
689000
2000
カーネギーメロン大学の学生です
11:46
When the actor who was getting up was a Carnegie Mellon student --
253
691000
4000
演技をしている学生がカーネギーメロンの学生の時
11:50
he was actually a Carnegie Mellon student --
254
695000
2000
実際 彼はそうでしたが
11:52
but he was a part of their group, cheating went up.
255
697000
4000
彼はグループの一員であり 不正は増加しました
11:56
But when he actually had a University of Pittsburgh sweatshirt,
256
701000
4000
しかし ピッツバーグ大学のパーカーを着てみたら
12:00
cheating went down.
257
705000
2000
不正は減ったのです
12:02
(Laughter)
258
707000
3000
（笑）
12:05
Now, this is important, because remember,
259
710000
3000
これは大切なことです 考えてみて下さい
12:08
when the moment the student stood up,
260
713000
2000
学生が立ち上がった瞬間
12:10
it made it clear to everybody that they could get away with cheating,
261
715000
3000
全員がズルをして帰っても良いという認識をもちました
12:13
because the experimenter said,
262
718000
2000
試験官が「全問終わったら
12:15
"You've finished everything. Go home," and they went with the money.
263
720000
2000
帰ってよい」というので 皆帰ったのです
12:17
So it wasn't so much about the probability of being caught again.
264
722000
3000
つまり ここでもまた単に捕まる可能性が問題なのではありません
12:20
It was about the norms for cheating.
265
725000
3000
これは不正してもよいかの判断の基準が問題なのです
12:23
If somebody from our in-group cheats and we see them cheating,
266
728000
3000
同じグループの人がズルをし それを見たならば
12:26
we feel it's more appropriate, as a group, to behave this way.
267
731000
4000
同じメンバーとして ズルをしてもよいという気になります
12:30
But if it's somebody from another group, these terrible people --
268
735000
2000
しかし その人が違うグループならば 最悪な人たち
12:32
I mean, not terrible in this --
269
737000
2000
いや この実験には最悪な人など本当はいませんよ
12:34
but somebody we don't want to associate ourselves with,
270
739000
2000
つまり 出来れば関係を保ちたくない人
12:36
from another university, another group,
271
741000
2000
別の大学の学生であるとかだと
12:38
all of a sudden people's awareness of honesty goes up --
272
743000
3000
急に 人々は正直になるわけです
12:41
a little bit like The Ten Commandments experiment --
273
746000
2000
これは「十戒」の実験に似ていますが
12:43
and people cheat even less.
274
748000
4000
ズルをする人は減ったのです
12:47
So, what have we learned from this about cheating?
275
752000
4000
さて ここから何が学べるでしょう？
12:51
We've learned that a lot of people can cheat.
276
756000
3000
まず 多くの人が不正をすることはわかりました
12:54
They cheat just by a little bit.
277
759000
3000
しかも ほんの少しだけズルをします
12:57
When we remind people about their morality, they cheat less.
278
762000
4000
ところが モラルに少しでも触れたとたん 不正は減ります
13:01
When we get bigger distance from cheating,
279
766000
3000
不正と少し距離が離れると
13:04
from the object of money, for example, people cheat more.
280
769000
4000
例えばお金以外のものだと ズルは増えます
13:08
And when we see cheating around us,
281
773000
2000
そして周りの人がズルをしているのを見ると
13:10
particularly if it's a part of our in-group, cheating goes up.
282
775000
4000
特に同じ仲間だと ズルは増えるのです
13:14
Now, if we think about this in terms of the stock market,
283
779000
3000
これを 証券市場に当てはめてみると
13:17
think about what happens.
284
782000
1000
どうでしょうか
13:18
What happens in a situation when you create something
285
783000
3000
多額のお金を他の何かで支払うと
13:21
where you pay people a lot of money
286
786000
2000
つまり現実を少し曲げて
13:23
to see reality in a slightly distorted way?
287
788000
3000
見るとどうなるでしょう
13:26
Would they not be able to see it this way?
288
791000
3000
この実験があてはまることが
13:29
Of course they would.
289
794000
1000
おわかりでしょう？
13:30
What happens when you do other things,
290
795000
1000
少し現金から離れたとたん
13:31
like you remove things from money?
291
796000
2000
何がおこるのでしょう？
13:33
You call them stock, or stock options, derivatives,
292
798000
3000
株券だとか オプションだとか デリバティブとか
13:36
mortgage-backed securities.
293
801000
1000
土地担保証券だとかありますよね
13:37
Could it be that with those more distant things,
294
802000
3000
こうして非現金のものを使うと
13:40
it's not a token for one second,
295
805000
2000
引換券ではないにしても
13:42
it's something that is many steps removed from money
296
807000
2000
現金からは何段階も離れているわけで
13:44
for a much longer time -- could it be that people will cheat even more?
297
809000
4000
長い目でみれば 人はよりズルをする傾向にあるのではないでしょうか？
13:48
And what happens to the social environment
298
813000
2000
さらに このような他人の行動を見ることは
13:50
when people see other people behave around them?
299
815000
3000
社会環境にどう影響を及ぼすのでしょう？
13:53
I think all of those forces worked in a very bad way
300
818000
4000
私はこれらの要因は全て証券市場では
13:57
in the stock market.
301
822000
2000
悪い方へ向かうと考えます
13:59
More generally, I want to tell you something
302
824000
3000
一般的には 行動経済学では
14:02
about behavioral economics.
303
827000
3000
次のようなことが言えます
14:05
We have many intuitions in our life,
304
830000
4000
私達は直観にかなり頼っていて
14:09
and the point is that many of these intuitions are wrong.
305
834000
3000
多くの場合その直観は間違っています
14:12
The question is, are we going to test those intuitions?
306
837000
3000
問題は そのような直観を省みるかどうかにあります
14:15
We can think about how we're going to test this intuition
307
840000
2000
自分たちが毎日の生活 ビジネス
14:17
in our private life, in our business life,
308
842000
2000
特に政策決定の場で
14:19
and most particularly when it goes to policy,
309
844000
3000
直観をどう使っているか考えてみるのです
14:22
when we think about things like No Child Left Behind,
310
847000
3000
例えば 教育制度だとか
14:25
when you create new stock markets, when you create other policies --
311
850000
3000
新しい証券市場を作る時や
14:28
taxation, health care and so on.
312
853000
3000
税制や社会福祉など 新しい政策を作る時です
14:31
And the difficulty of testing our intuition
313
856000
2000
そして この直観を確かめる難しさは
14:33
was the big lesson I learned
314
858000
2000
私自身がよく知っています
14:35
when I went back to the nurses to talk to them.
315
860000
2000
病院に戻って看護師たちと話した時
14:37
So I went back to talk to them
316
862000
2000
こんなことがありました
14:39
and tell them what I found out about removing bandages.
317
864000
3000
包帯の剥がし方についてわかったことを教えると
14:42
And I learned two interesting things.
318
867000
2000
二つの面白い答えが返ってきました
14:44
One was that my favorite nurse, Ettie,
319
869000
2000
私が好きだった看護師のエティは まず
14:46
told me that I did not take her pain into consideration.
320
871000
4000
看護師の気持ちを考えてないと言いました
14:50
She said, "Of course, you know, it was very painful for you.
321
875000
2000
エティは「もちろんあなたの痛みは当然だけど
14:52
But think about me as a nurse,
322
877000
2000
看護師のことも考えてみて
14:54
taking, removing the bandages of somebody I liked,
323
879000
2000
大好きな人の包帯を取る辛さを
14:56
and had to do it repeatedly over a long period of time.
324
881000
3000
しかも何度 何度も繰り返し
14:59
Creating so much torture was not something that was good for me, too."
325
884000
3000
苦しめ続けるのは 私にとっても楽なことではなかった」と
15:02
And she said maybe part of the reason was it was difficult for her.
326
887000
5000
ところが それほど彼女を苦しめた理由は
15:07
But it was actually more interesting than that, because she said,
327
892000
3000
もっと興味深い別の点にあって
15:10
"I did not think that your intuition was right.
328
895000
5000
「私は他人の直観が正しいと思ったことなどなく
15:15
I felt my intuition was correct."
329
900000
1000
自分の直観が正しいと思った」と続けました
15:16
So, if you think about all of your intuitions,
330
901000
2000
もし自分の身に置き換えてみれば
15:18
it's very hard to believe that your intuition is wrong.
331
903000
4000
自分の直観が間違っていると思うのは相当に難しいことです
15:22
And she said, "Given the fact that I thought my intuition was right ..." --
332
907000
3000
そして 彼女が言うには 私が自分の直観を正しいと思ったように
15:25
she thought her intuition was right --
333
910000
2000
彼女も自分の直観を正しいと思い
15:27
it was very difficult for her to accept doing a difficult experiment
334
912000
5000
別の視点をもつのはほぼ不可能なことだったのです
15:32
to try and check whether she was wrong.
335
917000
2000
自分が間違っているかどうか考えもしなかった
15:34
But in fact, this is the situation we're all in all the time.
336
919000
4000
しかし 実際には これはよくあることです
15:38
We have very strong intuitions about all kinds of things --
337
923000
3000
私達はあらゆることを強い直感を持って判断しています
15:41
our own ability, how the economy works,
338
926000
3000
自分の能力や これから経済がどう動くか
15:44
how we should pay school teachers.
339
929000
2000
教師にいくら給料を払うか
15:46
But unless we start testing those intuitions,
340
931000
3000
しかし この直観は確かめてみない限り
15:49
we're not going to do better.
341
934000
2000
改善の余地はないのです
15:51
And just think about how better my life would have been
342
936000
2000
もしあの看護師が自分たちの直観に疑いをもつことがあれば
15:53
if these nurses would have been willing to check their intuition,
343
938000
2000
私の病院生活はどれほど楽になっていたか
15:55
and how everything would have been better
344
940000
1000
自分の直感をより体系的に
15:56
if we just start doing more systematic experimentation of our intuitions.
345
941000
5000
調べることができれば 物事はもう少し上手く運んでいたのではないでしょうか
16:01
Thank you very much.
346
946000
2000
どうもありがとうございました
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economistThe dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why.
Why you should listen
Dan Ariely is a professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University and a founding member of the Center for Advanced Hindsight. He is the author of the bestsellers Predictably Irrational, The Upside of Irrationality, and The Honest Truth About Dishonesty -- as well as the TED Book Payoff: The Hidden Logic that Shapes Our Motivations.
Through his research and his (often amusing and unorthodox) experiments, he questions the forces that influence human behavior and the irrational ways in which we often all behave.
Dan Ariely | Speaker | TED.com